IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [re-ECN] Congestion Transparency (re-ECN) ad hoc BoF @Stockholm IETF

"Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov> Wed, 22 July 2009 22:06 UTC

Return-Path: <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
X-Original-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EF863A6BB4 for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:06:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.164
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.435, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V6L01UwH+Goa for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ndmsnpf02.ndc.nasa.gov (ndmsnpf02.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.0.122]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A77B33A68B0 for <re-ecn@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ndjsppt02.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsppt02.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.101]) by ndmsnpf02.ndc.nasa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7389510808A; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:55:52 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ndjshub02.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjshub02.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.4.161]) by ndjsppt02.ndc.nasa.gov (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6MKtqEq016182; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:55:52 -0500
Received: from NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov ([198.117.4.166]) by ndjshub02.ndc.nasa.gov ([198.117.4.161]) with mapi; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:55:52 -0500
From: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
To: Bob Briscoe <rbriscoe@jungle.bt.co.uk>, re-ECN unIETF list <re-ecn@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:55:49 -0500
Thread-Topic: [re-ECN] Congestion Transparency (re-ECN) ad hoc BoF @Stockholm IETF
Thread-Index: AcoK9u2FTKWwn5C/TmSltuJ3M08P4QAFu7ww
Message-ID: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB2282E06CFF@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
References: <200907221800.n6MI0s9a006678@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <200907221800.n6MI0s9a006678@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=1.12.7400:2.4.4, 1.2.40, 4.0.166 definitions=2009-07-22_10:2009-07-20, 2009-07-22, 2009-07-22 signatures=0
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] Congestion Transparency (re-ECN) ad hoc BoF @Stockholm IETF
X-BeenThere: re-ecn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: re-inserted explicit congestion notification <re-ecn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/re-ecn>
List-Post: <mailto:re-ecn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:06:58 -0000

How about an agenda item to clearly define "requirements" versus
"properties that would be nice".  This would, I think, be useful
in evaluating seriousness of some of the limitations listed in
draft-briscoe-tsvwg-re-ecn-tcp-motivation-00
as well as comparing alternatives in the deployment space and
concisely codify assumptions about other issues like the ECN nonce.

---------------------------
Wes Eddy
Network & Systems Architect
Verizon FNS / NASA GRC
Office: (216) 433-6682
---------------------------

>-----Original Message-----
>From: re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:re-ecn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
>Of Bob Briscoe
>Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 2:01 PM
>To: re-ECN unIETF list
>Subject: [re-ECN] Congestion Transparency (re-ECN) ad hoc BoF @Stockholm
>IETF
>
>Folks,
>
>I'd like to get together people who might be interested in helping
>organise a BoF on Congestion Transparency (re-ECN) for a future IETF.
>
>15:00 - 16:30 CET Thu 30 Jul Rm 501 @ Stockholm IETF conference venue
>
>Pls give ideas for agenda items (I will too).
>
>This isn't intended to be a general show-and-tell - it's mainly for
>people interested in helping/reviewing/discussing plans for a BoF to
>form an IETF working group. This should complement the design team
>work going on in ICCRG on a new capacity sharing architecture for the
>Internet.
><http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/wiki/CapacitySharingArch>
>
>For those who won't be able to attend (and those who will), this list
>would also be a fine place to start discussions.
>
>The main idea is to get some protocol specification activity going
>around re-ECN. Probably initially experimental track. So we can make
>some practical progress. But there is also room for writing docs
>about uses of congestion transparency and so on.
>
>My colleague Alan Smith has (finally) got the green light from our
>employers to open source the Linux kernel code he has written. And
>there are two implementations in ns2 that I know of, with another two
>being planned. So we ought to be making sure the spec becomes truly
>common property and starts to evolve to commonly agreed requirements.
>
>That means we have to be open to any changes, including using
>better/different fields in protocol headers, choosing a different
>name, and so on. But the most important thing is to make some
>practical progress.
>
>
>
>Bob
>
>
>________________________________________________________________
>Bob Briscoe,               Networks Research Centre, BT Research
>
>_______________________________________________
>re-ECN mailing list
>re-ECN@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email